Atrial approaches in mitral valve surgery: a propensity analysis of differences in the incidence of clinically relevant adverse effects.

BACKGROUND: The lack of evidence on complications using mitral valve approaches leaves the choice of risk exposure to the surgeon's preference, based on individual experience, speed, ease, and quality of exposure. METHODS: The present study analysed patients undergoing mitral valve surgery using a superior transseptal approach or a left-atrial approach between 2006 and 2018. We included first-time elective mitral valve procedures, isolated, or combined, without a history of rhythm disturbances. We used propensity score matching based on 26 perioperative variables. The primary endpoint was the association between the superior transeptal approach and clinically significant adverse outcomes, including arrhythmias, need for a permanent pacemaker, cerebrovascular events, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 652 patients met the inclusion criteria; 391 received the left atrial approach, and 261 received the superior transseptal approach. After matching, 96 patients were compared with 69 patients, respectively. The distribution of the preoperative and perioperative variables was similar. There was no difference in the incidence of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias or the need for treatment. The incidence of nodal rhythm (p = 0.008) and length of stay in intensive care (p = 0.04) were higher in the superior transseptal group, but the need for permanent pacemaker implantation was the same. Likewise, there was no difference in the need for anticoagulation due to arrhythmia, the incidence of cerebrovascular events or mortality in the postoperative period or in the long-term follow-up. CONCLUSION: We did not find an association with permanent heart rhythm disorders or any other significant adverse clinical outcome. Therefore, the superior transeptal approach is useful and safe for mitral valve exposure.

Social engagement within the facility increased life expectancy in nursing home residents: a follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Social engagement (SE) has been consistently shown to improve survival among community-dwelling older people, but the evidence in nursing home residents is inconclusive and prone to short-term reverse causation and confounding by major health determinants. Our main objective was to study the potential causal effect of within-the-facility social engagement (SE) on long-term all-cause mortality in care home residents. METHODS: A representative cohort of 382 nursing home residents in Madrid without severe physical and cognitive impairments at baseline was followed up for 10-year all-cause mortality. Standardized mortality curves for residents with low/null, moderate, and high levels of SE at baseline were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods and spline-based survival models with inverse probability of exposure weights conditional on baseline sociodemographic characteristics, facility features, comorbidity, and disability. Standardized 5-year mortality risks and median survival times were compared across levels of SE. RESULTS: The baseline prevalences of low/null, moderate, and high SE were 36, 44, and 20%, respectively. Compared with residents with low/null SE at baseline, the standardized differences (95% confidence intervals) in 5-year mortality risk were - 2.3% (- 14.6 to 10.0%) for moderately engaged residents and - 18.4% (- 33.8 to - 2.9%) for highly engaged residents. The median survival time increased by 0.4 (- 1.4 to 2.2) and 3.0 (0.8 to 5.2) years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Residents with high SE within the nursing home had an 18% lower 5-year mortality risk and a 3-year increase in their median survival, as compared with residents with similar health determinants but low/null SE. The development of adequate tailored intervention programs, addressed to increase SE in nursing home residents, could improve their long-term survival, in addition to expected gains in quality of life.